Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/01/29

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] 2002 beach noctilux photos
From: Martin Howard <mvhoward@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 12:32:17 -0800

BD wrote:

> truly bizarre isolating effect the lens has on the central subjects of 
> the
> photos

Dude, that's, like, the whole *point* of it, man!

(Hmm... need to get outta Santa Cruz for a while... ;)

Seriously: personally, I couldn't really give a toss whether it was 
shot with a Canon 50mm f/1.2, an f/1.0, an f/0.95, or the left-over, 
warped element from the Hubble telescope, the point is that Rei has put 
the lens to extremely good use.  To my eye, he's exploited the 
exceedingly narrow DOF you get with this lens wide open to capture the 
dreamy quality of life at twilight on a beach.  If you'd shot this with 
a 50mm f/2, or stopped down the Noctilux, you wouldn't capture this 
mood.  It'd be lost.  (OK -- I realize that the web page says *mostly* 
Noctilux, so obviously whatever else was used was used to good effect 
too... but I think I could pick out which are the Nocli shots.)

Now, what I think is interesting about this web page (the URL for those 
who've lost it is: 
http://www.shinozuka-family.com/20020622beach/.thumbnails/page.html), 
quite apart from the wonderful pictures on it, is that we get to 
compare different cameras/lenses/film combinations which have been 
exploited to the same end.

The Noctilux on the M6 on HP5+ does possess that dreamy quality.  The 
Holga pulls it off too, but for different reasons.  The Ilford 
disposable has some of it, but looses some.  The Contax T looses more 
(although the comparison is unfair: the Contax's shots are of a 
different kind).  The Fuji G645 folder produces stunning quality, but 
does not possess that dreamy quality.  And the worst of the lot, to my 
mind, are the Hassy shots, which have done an increadible job of 
capturing micro-contrast (look at the wood grain in the last shot), but 
it "records" rather than "interprets" what's infront the of lens.  If 
that makes any sense.

Of course, the real question is this: Why do you need a $2,000 camera 
and $2,500 lens to get the kind of shots you'd get with a $12 
camera/lens combo?

M.

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> (Re: [Leica] 2002 beach noctilux photos)